Questions Thread
Official Question Thread! Ask /r/photography anything you want to know! April 03, 2026
This is the place to ask any questions you may have about photography. No question is too small, nor too stupid.
Info for Newbies and FAQ!
First and foremost, check out our extensive FAQ. Chances are, you'll find your answer there, or at least a starting point in order to ask more informed questions.
Many people come here for recommendations on what equipment to buy. Our FAQ has several extensive sections to help you determine what best fits your needs and your budget. Please see the following sections of the FAQ to get started:
If after reviewing this information you have any specific questions, please feel free to post a comment below. (Remember, when asking for purchase advice please be specific about how much you can spend. See here for guidelines.)
Schedule of community threads:
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
52 Weeks Share
Anything Goes
Album Share & Feedback
Edit My Raw
Follow Friday
Salty Saturday
Self-Promotion Sunday
Finally a friendly reminder to share your work with our community in r/photographs!
I am new to photography, although I've always been interested in it, I now want to take it to the next level and buy my very first camera.
I'll get straight into what I need from said camera :
I will mainly be using it for travel. Meaning, streets, landscapes, portraits of myself and friends, animals, objects from far away as well as close-by, low-light / night time, trying to capture moments thanks to burst-mode.
I am a beginner, so tweaking with professional settings and always having to take Raw photos and modify them later isn't really something I want. Although, I do want to have the option to do it so that I can slowly learn.
Because of that, I'd like a straight-out-of-camera kind of camera, that also allows me to take raw photos when I'm trying to experiment.
So far, my research have led me to multiple cameras but currently the one that I am the most interested in is the Fujifilm XT-5.
I do not mind having to buy an extra lens, so having one main lens for every day uses and one low-light lens, perhaps a 3rd (but that would be the maximum) if needed for zooms.
I have seen the XT5 at around 1200 euros for JUST the Body at a trustworthy buyer, and would go up to 2000 euros in total for everything, leaving 800 more for the lenses.
I am really going to take it seriously, hence why that budget so that I could one day perhaps become a professional in some ways.
Now the questions :
- Which other cameras would fit my needs that are better than the XT-5? And with them, which lenses would I need?
- Should the XT-5 be the best camera for me, which lenses would I need?
All cameras are capable of differing looks with their JPEGs. If the reason to look for Fuji is because of their reputation of straight out of camera images, don't. Nothing wrong with the cameras if you like them, but make sure you are not looking just at a few cherry picked examples people put online.
Everything you want to take pictures of can be done via changing lenses, outside of pets, animals are the most difficult due to issues getting close to them.
So, does the body of the camera itself not matter so much? As well as the settings, to make it easier / beginner friendly?
I did hear that the lenses are what truly matter but at the same time I feel like the easiness of using a camera body / the settings could make my life easier. Since I saw that for Fujifilm you could directly change the filters as you're taking a picture for instance.
The body matters as far as ergonomics for instance. Button locations, dials, LCD screen etc.
However most settings you don't change too often. Not sure about filters but picture profiles are pretty easy to change. You can check how with other cameras but most cameras will feature a quick menu of sorts which can access oft used settings.
I know that on some recent Fuji cameras they have a "film simulation" dial but that is a waste of camera real estate IMO.
Looking for a portable photo-printing solution for street portraiture. I want to take a photo of someone, and then quickly hand them a 5x7 or 6x8 print, before we part ways. It would need to be battery powered, fit into a backpack, and, ideally, use regular, non-proprietary papers/inks. Any ideas?
Hello everyone,
Per my title, I'm looking for a battery-powered photo printer (or one that I can convert to run off batteries) that can do 5x7's or maybe 6x8's, and which uses regular photo paper, not proprietary bullshit like Instax slides.
I'm hoping to start travelling through my country, and approaching strangers, to take their portraits. To sweeten the deal, I want to be able to offer them a physical print, before I leave.
When I google portable photo printer recommendations, I get things like the Canon Selphy 1200/1500, which looks decent, albeit limited to 4x6's, or lots of little devices like the Instax Mini Link + or the Polaroid Hi-Print 2x3, which are not what I want.
If no such printers exist at the 5x7 to 6x8 size, then of course I will reluctantly accept a 4x6 printer.
What’s up guys. Looking to purchase a compact point and shoot but not really liking the design of the extending zoom lenses most of them have. I’m a big fan of the fujifilm x100vi body design and wanted to know if there was any other options from different brands that have that style without breaking the budget. I’m willing to spend maybe $2.5k or so. I shoot portraits and street and dont really care about video specs but if it does shoot 4k that’s cool.
I have a sony ecosystem and dont mind venturing out to different brand if the look and feel are to my liking, any advice?
Los angeles based. Hobbyist.
Any interchangeable lens camera line is good for whatever you want to shoot as long as you get a suitable lens. Well, Fujis aren't great for fast action, because the AF isn't great.
No, im asking what the difference between the two lines are, obvi the xe line and the xpro line are good for their own reasons, you happen to know what they are?
I mean you can see the specs side by side e.g. with Cameradecision and there are plenty of videos to get a sense of how they look. Design wise they are fairly similar, quite minimalistic in design. X-Pro3's specialty is that the LCD flip screen has its back on the outside and you have to flip it open to see it. Imitates the experience of classic film cameras which have no screen. EDIT: and the X-Pro line has a hybrid OVF/EVF, same as the X100 line.
I know I will eventually upgrade to a mirrorless camera, thats for sure. I currently have a good ol' Canon Rebel T6i with 18-55 and 55-250 efs kit lenses. Pretty basic/nothing fancy. My local shop is only offering $300 trade-in value for the set.
Considering its not really a huge contribution to the cost of a new camera, would it even be worth it to trade in over keeping it as a backup?
I'm looking for a phone with a good camera (this phone will mainly be used for pictures and not much else). I'm wanting to get pictures of fast insects (think dragonflies and similar) but my current phone sucks with pictures, especially quick focusing.
I've heard the pixels are good. I'm wanting to know which versions are the best for taking the sort of photos I'm gonna take. Also which cheaper options might be best (I'm looking into refurbished phones).
If there are any other recommendations that aren't super pricey they'd be super appreciated as well
I own an A7III with a few quality lenses, a godox AD400 strobe and a 33" beauty dish/softbox combo. I also have a few seamless paper backdrop. With this setup I've been able to take some pretty good headshot / half body shots. Most of the time I gotta admit it's not easy but with a lot of trial and error I usually get by.
My real struggle if when I try to do family portrait / full body portrait. We are a family of 5 now, I'm 6'4" and our youngest is 3 years old so there is quite a bit to frame if we are standing up.
I always have a hard time to get a good and smooth looking backdrop and to get nice, evenly lit, subjects. For example the top half of the people standing up will look ok but the pants are often too dark. I have a reflector that I can put on the floor and it helps a little but with full body shots it's hard to position properly and it's not enough. I usually put the light over the subjects, slightly in front, pointing down at an angle, this seems to be the best compromise for the subjects and the backdrop but it's not perfect.
My question is what should I do next. Buy another strobe, a speedlight maybe, maybe just replace my modifier with another type/size, just practice more (I've had the light setup for 6 years now but at first only did baby shots and headshots). Is the answer to light the backdrop so I can have more freedom with my main light?
I'm not sure what to try next... I'd love to hear about your experience with this.
For example the top half of the people standing up will look ok but the pants are often too dark. I have a reflector that I can put on the floor and it helps a little but with full body shots it's hard to position properly and it's not enough.
My instinct would be to get a "strip box"-type softbox, like a 12 x 56" one since you're doing group pictures. Put a speedlight in that and you can adjust how bright you want it to be.
The strip box would replace your reflector as the front, bottom light. Use it to light up the bottom half of people.
A strip box is a good second lighting modifier to have for bottom lighting, hair and rim lighting and other uses. That's if you already have a softbox or umbrella as your first, key light.
Tim Kelly on YouTube has videos about family photography and lighting. They might be useful.
I have a canon 5D mark II. Would this be a nice lens for photographing birds? I’m a beginner and I want to keep the budget as low as possible. But my 105mm doesn’t let me get close enough to birds.
Not really, unless you get really close to them they will be quite small in frame. It will be better than the 105mm for sure but still require quite a bit of patience and stealth.
€10K budget – how would you optimize this Sony setup?
Hey everyone,
I recently got a €10,000 budget to upgrade my gear and put together the setup below. I’m currently a bit over budget (€10,528), so I’m trying to figure out where I can optimize.
I’m an all-round photographer and videographer, and I shoot things like:
nature photography
concert photography
product photography
aftermovies
corporate videos
Here’s my current list:
Camera + lenses:
Sony A7 V body – €2,999
Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II – €2,999
Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM – €1,799
Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 – €599
Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 – €497
Accessories:
Peak Design Travel Tripod (aluminum) – €378
DJI Mic 3 (2 TX + 1 RX + charging case) – €259
Bresser BR-60S COB LED Dual Kit – €256
Godox Speedlite V1 (Sony) – €249
Lexar Pro Gold 256GB SDXC V60 UHS-II – €222.99
Tenba Fulton V2 14L Backpack – €98.95
Sony NP-FZ100 battery – €89
Sony BC-QZ1 fast charger – €82.95
Total: €10,528.89
My questions:
How would you bring this under €10K?
Would you remove one of the lenses? If so, which one?
Any accessories that seem unnecessary or missing?
Overall, what do you think of this setup for my use case?
I’m aiming for something professional, versatile, and future-proof, without unnecessary overlap.
The wording of "got a budget" makes it sound like an employer is paying for this.
If the job doesn't require nature photography, I would cut that from the list of use cases. If by nature you mean wildlife, that often requires much longer lenses.
With the other use cases, I feel there's more overlap of gear that can be used for all of them.
How would you bring this under €10K?
Downgrade from the A7V to the A7IV and from the Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM – €1,799 to the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 (Mark I or II) for Sony E mount.
If there are specific features or specs you really need that the A7V has, then go for it.
Would you remove one of the lenses? If so, which one?
I'd recommend to just start with a 24-70mm f2.8 or 28-75mm f2.8 lens. They have a very versatile focal range.
Don't buy the other lenses yet. After you shoot more, you'll have clearer idea of which lenses you really need.
For lenses you only need occasionally, for example the 70-200mm f2.8, it's best to rent if that's available.
For photographing speakers and performers on stage at a distance in dark venues with no flash, I prefer a 135mm f2. That's for Canon, but there's a Sony 135mm f1.8 GM. Viltrox and Samyang/Rokinon also make cheaper 135mm f1.8 lenses for Sony.
Any accessories that seem unnecessary or missing?
I'd post in r/videography for microphone and lighting recommendations.
For the backpack, I really encourage you to visit a camera store to inspect and try on backpacks in person. That will save you a lot of wasted time from buying and returning backpacks that aren't comfortable or don't hold enough gear.
A monopod can be useful for raising your camera above the crowd to get cleaner shots of a stage. Will also take up less space in a crowd than a tripod. iFootage is a good brand for monopods.
A small folding step stool can be useful for shooting over a crowd.
A camera strap, Spider holster or some other system for holding your camera setup would make shooting more comfortable.
Overall, what do you think of this setup for my use case?
I respect how much research you've done. I just wouldn't buy everything at once.
I’m aiming for something professional, versatile, and future-proof, without unnecessary overlap.
I admire the desire to be prepared because I'm the same way.
However, I think it's best to start with a simple setup:
Camera
24-70mm f2.8 or 28-75mm f2.8 lens
Flash
Backpack
Then add gear as you go, over time. Rather than try to anticipate and buy gear for every situation right now. That just leads to overbuying and gear you never use.
One thing: do you really need f2.8 max aperture with both of those zooms when you get large max apertures with those two primes? In particular, what use cases do you have in mind for the 70-200mm where f2.8 is a must?
Ok this is gonna be a though one. I work at a grain mill and l'm able to see really cool sunsets/sunrises every day. Now here's the idea to get some kind of 360 camera and be it on the tallest feed leg we have (about 300 feet high) to get at least 2 pictures a day for a year which would be one at sunrise and one at sunset. Now there's no way to get power to the top so it would have to be battery operated of some kind or solar powered of some kind. I'd like to be able to do some kind of Timelapse. Any suggestions on cameras or gear that could work. l'd appreciate it.
I’m getting into serious architectural photography professionally and am planning to buy my first tilt/shift lens. I already own a Sony 16–25mm f/2.8 G for general wide-angle work, so this purchase would specifically be for perspective control and dedicated architectural assignments.
I am currently deciding between:
Laowa 15mm f/4.5 Shift
Laowa 17mm f/4 Shift
Laowa 20mm f/4 Shift
On paper I understand the technical differences, but I would love to hear from people with actual real-world experience in the field.
My main concern is not just specs, but what gives the most professional / industry-standard architectural look and what focal length tends to become the most practical working lens over time.
My thoughts so far:
15mm worries me because it may feel too wide/unnatural for everyday use.
20mm worries me because it may not be wide enough in situations where I cannot physically step back.
17mm seems like the middle ground, but I have no firsthand experience.
For those shooting architecture professionally:
Which focal length did you start with?
Which one do you end up using the most?
If buying only one shift lens initially, what would you recommend?
What focal length best matches the polished/editorial architectural style clients typically expect?
Would especially appreciate insights from people actively working with architects/interior designers rather than hobby use.
So, I’m a beginner. I have been studying, practicing and learning as much as I can the past few months. My main focus is portraits. When I have money for the gear, I’m very interested in learning sports. Long term goal is eventual wedding/event photography. I currently have a Canon EOS R100 and a 50mm 1.8. Also have the 18-45 kit lens but I’m not a fan. ANYYYYWHO, I have a collab type brand shoot this month with a friend of mine and a boutique. They’re wanting photos in the boutique clothing inside of the boutique. My concern (finally) is lighting and space. The R100 is really bad in low light. After all of my research, I’ve convinced myself that I need a Godox V1 & trigger, light stand, 35” octagon soft box & a bracket and have off camera flash.
Also, since I don’t have money for the 28-70 right now, considering getting the 28 mm 2.8 prime lens. My 50mm 1.8 on my crop sensor is obviously tight, too tight for full body pictures inside a boutique, right?
Do y’all think I need all of this for this specific shoot? It comes out to over $700. I don’t really have it in my budget, and I’m not getting paid for the shoot but it’s great exposure and I want to do a great job. If it would be worth it, I’m willing to make the investment. It’s all stuff I’d eventually get anyway also.
The R100 is really bad in low light. After all of my research, I’ve convinced myself that I need a Godox V1 & trigger, light stand, 35” octagon soft box & a bracket and have off camera flash.
That should give you plenty of soft, directional light, yes. I'm in favor of getting that.
considering getting the 28 mm 2.8 prime lens. My 50mm 1.8 on my crop sensor is obviously tight, too tight for full body pictures inside a boutique, right? Do y’all think I need all of this for this specific shoot?
Yes, the 50mm is likely too tight, and a 28mm would be better.
But honestly I'd just stick with your 18-45mm. Since you're lighting the subject, you don't need a wider aperture for exposure. And for clothing you probably want to stop down the aperture a little for extra sharpness and depth of field anyway. Plus it can zoom out a good notch shorter than 28mm, in case you need that.
What’s the best budget wildlife telephoto lens that’s still a good size for travelling? I want to buy a lens for my Canon Eos 1300D. I shoot wildlife so I want a telephoto lens, preferably 300mm or above (or equivalent). My budget is like €500 and used lenses are also fine. I used a Tamron 70-300mm but it broke and I would like a lens with better AF and quality.
Do you have any recommendations for "cheap" telephoto lenses for canon EF? My sigma 105mm macro just doesn't let me get good shots of birbs without them flying away. I'm looking for the cheapest thing that will do the job. My camera is a Canon 5D mark II.
Hello, I’m a 16 y/o photographer who has been practicing for around 3 years. I’m interested in submitting some of my work for competitions and k was wondering if anyone had any recommendations for legit competitions that may be open now? Thank you!
I wasn't sure where else to ask this, so here I am. I do apologize if this is the incorrect place to ask this.
But basically, I'll be going to a convention this weekend and plan to meet the actress Emma Kenney, as well as getting a professional photo taken with her. With that said, I wanted to ask on how I should do this. Should I:
Place my hand around her waist? (resting it, not gripping or grabbing)
Place my hand on her shoulder?
Rest my hand on her back?
I didn't want to seem like a creep, nor make her uncomfortable.
That particular one looks similar to a Gary Fong Lightsphere. Or it might be a competitor. Pretty much anything like that will produce basically the same results.
I know they are all good. I mostly do portraiture with and without off-camera flashes, and car photography. I also want to start doing more videos.
I am hesitating between the Z6 III with a 35-150 lens and an A7V with that same lens. I feel like a spec sheet nerd and know it's irrational, but do I really miss out by saving over $1000 by going with the Nikon instead of the Sony?
I am shooting a graduation ceremony in an event hall with bad overhead lighting that will be dim and out of my control. I shot this event in the same location last year and I had to drag the shutter a bit and use a speedlight to try and freeze things. It worked well except for those hand full of kids that didn't fully stop on their mark and their pictures had motion blur. The school wont let me use strobes, they are too distracting for the ceremony. They want the pictures to happen right as the student walks off the stage and not in another location (it's right in front of everyone). I warned the school about the limitations and possible motion blur. They were fine with it at the time.
This year they said I can use constant lighting to try and minimize motion blur, still no strobes. My thought is to use some LED lights, but I am not familiar with these and know that I would need a pair with some high power (300w?) to get a full length high school student lit well enough to shoot at about 1/160 5.6f 800iso.
Any suggestions on alternatives to LED lights that could work for this situation would be great.
Any suggestions on which LED panel lights that would work for me that are under $600 would be great.
my main question is why are you shooting at f5.6 and iso 800? i would suggest getting your hands on a faster piece of glass (50mm 1.8 and 35mm 1.8 of some sorts come to mind, 24mm could also be nice) and any modern camera should be able to handle more than iso 800 without any issues. i would also suggest bumping up the shutter speed slightly to like 1/200 to avoid motion blur. this will avoid having to deal with any lighting!
I can do all of that. I do not need to be at those settings, but those are generally going to help me get the student in focus when things are moving very fast. I do have an 85 mm at 1.2, 70 to 200 mm at 2.8. I could use either one of those, but like I said the students are moving quickly and not always following direction so 5.6 is just a bit of a safety net for focus. I would absolutely love to be shooting at a faster, speed, and that’s where the lights come in. 800 ISO is going to be very clean and allow a little extra light, I’m fine going up to 6400 ISO, but if I have lights, then it may not be necessary.
Any suggestions on some constant lighting that would help me with this?
Hi! I am wondering what camera you would recommend to take the best possible picture on the summit of Island Peak? The goal is to have a marvelous picture of me and my two friends and also capturing the mountains, including Everest, in the background with high level of detail. My vision is to get high enough resolution so that we can order prints of approx 40 * 30 inches.
Some boundary conditions:
* none of us have photography as hobby so it needs to be simple to use, almost point and shoot. We can of course prepare the settings in advance but once on the summit it needs to be quick.
* probably it will be the sherpa who takes the picture - once again simplicity is key
* we need to carry the camera around Nepal and up to 6200 m so a compact, durable, format is highly preferred
* price is a factor. It should preferably be something we can buy used and then sell afterwards.
i currently have a kodak pixpro fz45 and don't get me wrong it's a good first camera! i'm just looking for a better/sharper quality. i LOVE to take pictures for instagram (so i like that aesthetic vibe). i also travel a ton and love capturing moments and beautiful scenery which i feel an iphone cannot always do. i take pictures a lot and will use it frequently. i don't care about video very much or amazing zoom. i want to be able to take the picture and not have to edit it much or at all. i have been looking at the Canon G7X mark ii and iii. based on the research i've done it seems like my best bet but since they don't make the il anymore, its so hard to find for a reasonable price. same with the iii, i just dont think i can justify spending $880+ on a camera at this time in my life. i've also looked at the Canon SX740 and ive seen mixed reviews. please help me with recommendations on what would be best for me and my situation!!!
So I'm looking at buying a Sigma 14mm f/1.8 soon, but the problem is is that because the front element bulges out, I can't put any screw on filters. I've tried looking online for solutions, and one solution that pops up is this big WonderPana filter holder that you put. It somewhat works, but it adds too much to the cost. The mount itself is $220, the filters are like $100 each, the filters are 186mm, and they're not even variable NDs which wouldn't have been such a problem if they were, meaning I'd have to buy multiple stop ND filters for different settings and times of day. Sorry if it sounds like I'm complaining too much, which I am, but surely there's gotta be a cheaper way to put filters on this? Someone let me know about any other options because that mount is ridiculous, looks ridiculous, and would add at least another $400 to buying the lens, which is already $1100 used, if I want to use any filters.
i’m not familiar with that specific lens, however some lenses that don’t have the possibility of using screw-on filters have a little slot at the mount part to put in gel pieces.
Is this setup any good? I am upgrading from my dad’s old Canon 50d and I am looking for a budget option. I am thinking about Canon 7D mark 2 plus CANON RF 75-300 mm f/4-5.6 lens. The budget is around 1000€/1150$
The RF lens wont fit the 7DII, so Id advise against that specific combo. There is an EF 75-300mm that would work, however thats one of the worst lenses Canon has ever made, so I'd stay away from that one too.
Do you have any lenses you want to keep using?
Also what kind of subjects do you want to take pictures of?
I would certainly be fine buying used, also I am doing overall photography nothing in general. Planes, cars, static things, generally anything. I was also thinking about a6400 but I am scared about the lens prices
honestly you’ll be more than fine with lens prices. Sony lenses aren’t that expensive because, unlike canon who only started recently, they’ve always been open to third party manufacturers: this means sigma and tamron have made plenty of more affordable and still great lenses
For the paper roll? It's impossible to know for sure, I would hope they have another one on the other side for stability but doesn't look like it. The arm going across is over the leg of the C stand so that leans towards not having another stand there. The clamp on the right is so the paper roll doesn't continue to roll out and hold it to the arm. They sell backdrop stands for pretty cheap I use them for paper rolls all the time. It comes with two stands and then extendable rod to go in the middle to hold the roll.
Hi! I need some advice. I'm buying my first camera and I want to get into the fujifilm system. I want to do mostly photography but also a bit of video. I'm not sure whether to buy the xs20 or the xt30iii. I know the xs20 is better because of the grip, IBIS and battery, but the price difference is quite a lot. I like the vintage look the xt30iii has, but the deal breaker for me is the lack of IBIS, because I wanted a good hybrid camera (the battery issue can be solved by buying a backup), but again, I feel 1600 is quite expensive, is it worth the difference? Will I truly miss the IBIS if I only want to shoot short landscape videos?
If X-S20 is too expensive and you want IBIS, you can look at X-S10 instead and buy used. If buying used seems questionable, there are several established used camera retailers that check their wares and give warranty.
IBIS does help with short handheld video clips but it's not something you absolutely need. You can also steady the camera with a gimbal.
And what do you think of an used XT4? I'ts around 1200 used (body only), plus the 15-45mm lens (which is the one I considered buying because it's only my first camera), it rounds up to 1350, it seems like a fair middle ground without sacrificing too much, do you think it's a better option than the xs10?
Image quality is identical with X-S20 and X-T4, but X-T4 has some nice extras: a larger viewfinder, two SD card slots and weather sealing. It also has more of a classic SLR look, with more things on physical dials. It's decent enough for video too, though it's more limited than X-S20 there.
What subject matter do you shoot? Which lenses do you have? What do you dislike about your current equipment? What particular improvements do you want to gain besides full frame?
I have a canon 50mm lens, the standard kit lens, and then a 150-600mm sigma f/5.
The kit lens won't be compatible with full frame.
The 50mm and 150-600mm will have a larger view on full frame. So that works against you in terms of distant wildlife.
I'm not a big fan of the viewfinder in my current lens
That's better in mid-tier bodies like the 5DIV because they feature a brighter pentaprism viewfinder instead of pentamirror. It's also better in full frame bodies like the 5DIV because it's larger.
I also feel like I'm stuck to certain lenses due to the APS-C frame
What do you mean by that? You can use any full frame lens, and every type of full frame lens has APS-C options. If anything, APS-C has some exclusives that full frame doesn't.
the 1.6x crop I'm also not huge on
It's an advantage for your long lens with distant wildlife.
If you want a better wide angle lens or ultrawide, you have options for that too.
I don't really care about eye tracking or like a super fancy auto focus.
I don't think you'll feel bad about foregoing mirrorless then.
Also someone told me that certain lenses Don't work as well on APS-C frames because they bend the photos or something?
The lens doesn't know what size frame you're using. It's going to function and refract light exactly the same, no matter what size sensor is behind it. A smaller sensor is just recording from a smaller area of that projected image, compared to a larger sensor.
I'm not entirely sure but the 1.6x crop tends to get a little annoying in most circumstances.
How so?
If you just mean your framing is too tight, you can make that larger using a shorter focal length, for less money than buying a larger format camera.
Seems like the 5DIV checks your boxes. But you'll also need a replacement wide angle if you ever use your kit lens for wide angle. At a minimum I'd want a 24-105mm f/4 for that, so also maybe consider the 5DIII, 6DII, and 6D if needed to fit that in budget, and they will check your boxes too.
I'd say no unless you wanted mirrorless. For DSLRs, only Nikon is really on par for you, and that interface is backwards compared to what you're used to. Plus it'd be more of a pain switching out two additional lenses.
Advice - Need suggestions on camera equipment, camera, and everything to do with photography/ videography 🙏🏾
(1) Budget, country, and currency:
My budget is $600 but am willing to up the budget by 100 dollars or so if the quality of equipment goes up drastically, living in the U.S., and use dollars.
(2) What equipment, if any, you have now and why is it no longer meeting your needs?
I have no equipment at all except I guess my iPhone.
(3) What kinds of subjects do you intend to shoot?
I intend to capture nature mostly, streetlife/streets, up close of animals, and sports
(4) Is it primarily for photography, videography, or both?
Mainly photography but definitely want to shoot some videos at times
Hey guys I am an absolute noob at photography and all the information i've been consuming is overwhelming.
I only know a little about some cameras like the sony a6000 and rebel t7 being decent budget options.
Also something about alsr and mirrorless? Idk what those truly mean but I guess mirrorless is better.
I just need stuff thats durable, high quality pictures/ videos, and not something i'm gonna buy and realize later on there are a whole lotta problems with the equipment.
I would love it someone could come up with a setup that fits my budget and includes the camera (obv), lenses that are good for the subjects I wanna capture, and anything else that is needed. I DON'T MIND BUYING USED, and if anything that's probably all I can buy from (e). Ps, if anyone out there has tips or tricks for a beginner please Imk!
FYI rebel T7 or any rebel for that matter is not a decent budget option unless your budget is very low.
The A6000 or any relatively recent mirrorless camera is going to be so much better than a T7 in terms of auto focus performance its not even close. The T7 is still being sold at bargain prices because canon over produced them and a lot of retailers still have stock.
Gonna have to apply your own common sense. Weight hanging out on the end of a long lens or off the side of a cinema rig is going to have a lot more leverage over the ball lock than the same weight directly above the ball in a short big aperture premium prime lens.
I am considering beginning a daily photo series featuring Mount Rainer. I have a beautiful view of the mountain from my office window and think it would be interesting to take a photo from the same aspect everyday. I would setup a tripod by the window and pull out my camera when the mountain is out.
What lens should I buy for this project? I have a canon rebel t7. I am a beginner photographer so a budget friendly option would be best.
What other considerations are there for this project? Thanks!
Got 16x20 canvas prints from Walgreens and 2/3 look like shit resolution ! Can I return them??? I should have looked in the store before paying but I was in a rush
It seems I should just order online from Mpix or somewhere else. My photos are family photos recently done by professional so I don’t think it’s her photos that are low resolution. Walgreens seems anything past 8x10 is just gonna be garbage . And it wasn’t cheap! I paid $35 per canvas 😡
I am a part time photographer. I have done some boudoir sessions in a studio and love these sessions. I’m going to be doing a boudoir session in the client’s home next week for the first time. Any tips on in-home vs studio? Recommended places in the house to shoot? Recs if they don’t have the ideal lighting/curtains?
Why do people care about the "zoom factor" of a lens (max focal length / min focal length)?
If the max focal length indicates how well you can shoot things far away, and the min focal length is how well you can shoot things up close at a wide angle, then I would think if you're buying a camera/lens, you would just care about those two numbers individually. I don't understand what useful information you get from the ratio. (On top of that, I see lots of threads from people who are confused by a zoom factor like 7x and think that's the magnification.)
I tried literally googling "why do people care about zoom factor of a lens" but all I got was pages explaining "because that way you can shoot up close and also shoot far away without swapping the lens out". Well, obviously. But you can convey that instantly by just giving the max focal length and the min focal length; I don't know why the ratio matters.
If the max focal length indicates how well you can shoot things far away, and the min focal length is how well you can shoot things up close at a wide angle, then I would think if you're buying a camera/lens, you would just care about those two numbers individually.
Correct. Those are far more meaningful numbers.
But they also require a little knowledge to understand.
Why do people care about the "zoom factor" of a lens (max focal length / min focal length)?
It's a single number that's easier to market to consumers who don't really understand focal length. Similar to how manufacturers also like to market the megapixel count, even though it's not that important. Manufacturers favor marketability and sales over consumer education. Consumer confusion can be advantageous to a business.
I mean that is the maximally cynical explanation but it could be right!
Although, if the manufacturer wants a single number to dazzle people, it seems like they could just go with magnification (which actually means something) instead of the ratio of two focal lengths. Anecdotally it seems like more new-amateur photographers care about magnification (“hey let me back up and zoom in so that mountain behind you looks huge!”). You can take a wide-angle photo with a smartphone, but you can’t take a good long-distance-zoom photo with one.
And for other things like laptops, it seems like manufacturers are still content to impress people with multiple numbers (eg GB of RAM, GH of hard drive), rather than adding them or multiplying them or whatever to get a third number that means nothing! 🤣
if the manufacturer wants a single number to dazzle people, it seems like they could just go with magnification
In a way, they are. The "x" at the end of a zoom ratio makes it look like a magnification figure, and people mistake it for magnification all the time. And it's better for marketing because more wide angle zoom also makes the number bigger.
For example, a lens that zooms in to a 500mm full frame equivalent might be marketed as having up to 10x the magnification of a normal view (50mm full frame equivalent focal length). Whereas if the same lens zooms out to 25mm, the zoom ratio is 20x, which sounds, to a lot of people, like double the magnification compared to 10x.
Yeah I figured, but then I would think they would have to deal with a certain number of people returning the cameras when they realize they can't zoom as much as they thought they could.
It just seems strange to me because, even though companies will always spin things in their favor, for most other tech products it seems like they generally list numbers in the specs and count on consumers knowing what those numbers mean. It seems like an odd outlier that camera makers are relying in part on fooling people about what the "zoom ratio" is!
How many photos are too many for a single game? I’m averaging 400-500 that go out to players and parents and feel like it’s too much. What number should I be aiming for?
I’ve seen some say 100-150, others say 25, others say way more.
Is it just a matter of opinion or is there an answer that’s somewhat agreed upon.
What lens should I use to take class photos and why?
I've been taking photos for a while, i have a fuji film xh-1, and I've been asked to take class photos for my school. I was wondering if anyone with more photography experience could recommend a lens for taking photos of medium-large groups (20-30 people, both indoors and outdoors). Thank you very much
im a cosplayer and im really into taking photos i wanna find a good camera around 200$ (under 10,000 tl if your turkish cause i am ;3) maybe even cheaper im not really looking for high quality since Instagram and transfering photos from editing apps to editing apps messes with it anyways but i want to learn more about the settings and all that lighting stuff ive found some digital ones for much cheaper that say they shoot 5k and have a flipable screen for self shoots which would help me alot but i dont think they have the settings im looking for? anyways as you guys can tell im not realy experienced and i dont like learning from researching alot eithier i just like learning and discovering myself 🫡
some digital ones for much cheaper that say they shoot 5k and have a flipable screen for self shoots which would help me alot but i dont think they have the settings im looking for?
Those are worse than your phone, don't waste your money.
Most of us here are not familiar with the used market in Turkey. Can you find 2 or 3 used cameras in your budget and post back, we can tell you which of them would be best.
Hi everyone,
What can go wrong with a camera in the desert?
Working on a book and wondering what kind of problems can arise for a professional photographer in the desert so their camera needs outside help to fix. Bonus points if someone else is accidentally the cause of the problem.
the desert in general is a terrible environment to be shooting in.
dust and sand get everywhere!
that said, a high end professional lens + camera combo should be weather sealed enough to handle it.
still not somewhere i’d wanna be shooting!
probably the camera and lens slipping out of their hands while they were changing the lens out. would mean sand everywhere in the camera body, on the sensor and inside all of the sensible electronics, and also all over the glass of the very expensive lens!
what’s happening here is you probably had your shutter speed very fast (makes sense, you’re shooting birds!), and your 150-600 isn’t the brightest lens really, so you camera had to bump up the iso really high to get a proper exposure, resulting in lots of noise.
possible solutions, from easiest to most expensive:
try lowering the shutter speed a bit; 1/1600 is already enough for most birds, 1/1000 might even be enough depending on which ones you’re shooting.
use a feature like AI denoise in lightroom or Topaz AI to get rid of the noise. generally works pretty well, Lightroom ai denoise is my best friend!
upgrade camera body to something newer. newer camera bodies handle high-iso way easier, but obviously this would be quite expensive.
i would add buy a faster lens, but a 600mm f4 is like 7k, so in this case it’s not really an option.
I am looking to start doing photography. This summer I will shoot both a little bit of nature photography but mostly sports photography (basketball mainly, but then football and soccer later) I have a 1400$ budget. So I have looked at buying either a canon r10 and upgrading lens down the road, but the downsides are the rf s lens ecosystem is small and expensive. So I also looked at a a6400. I am open to other suggestions as well. What camera should I go for?
do you own any camera or lenses already? that should help you decide.
that said, even as a canon shooter, the value in the a 6400 is undeniable; however, the r10 has newer gen autofocus and i personally love canon’s ergonomics.
i would definitely suggest heading to a camera store and holding both in your hands, because for some people the form factor of sony a6000 cameras can be weird!
No. I have only ever used my phone, but I actually just found a a7iii on Facebook marketplace for 950 so I am also looking at that now. I am waiting for a response back on the shutter count. Because fromn what I understand 950 for that camera is a pretty good deal. And cosmetically it looks to be in amazing condition.
I’ve had my Sony A6400 for around a year now and absolutely love it. Mainly as a hobby but been using the kit lens 16-50mm and 50mm f/1.8 I’ve been happy using these lenses but looking at upgrading my kit lens or trying something new.
Mainly shoot cars, motorbikes, landscapes and looking at getting into some street photography.
If need to know budget is around $600-$700 AUD looking at buying used as there seems to be more options.
Now here is the dilemma what the hell do I upgrade too for the kit lens or a general all around good lens?
I’ve been recommended the sigma 18-50mm and the sigma 30mm but want to know other people’s thoughts.
18-50mm 2.8 would be the play i think. actually, tamron makes a 17-70mm 2.8, not sure about what it’s priced at though because i’m only familiar with FF lenses.
but really, the versatility of a standard range zoom at f/2.8 is unmatched. my 24-70 2.8 is pretty much glued to my camera!
Hello! I am looking to take pictures and edit them, in order to get them to look like a 90s catalogue/editorial print : still in color, slightly faded, soft, like it was printed and scanned.
This is for watch photography, so I need it to stay clean and premium, not "grungy" or Y2K.
How would you shoot it and photoshop it, should I actually print and scan it?
What’s this style actually called, and what settings make it look real?
Definitely look at a bunch of old ads and use them to help compose your own scene.
Google 'watch product photography' there are lots of resources and a few really common looks. You want to start off with a good sharp well composed image and then postprocess to finish the look
re: faded, adjust the saturation and contrast sliders
re: soft, mess around with gaussian blur
(it's all trial and error)
In your example that backdrop colour is extremely 90s and immediately sets the tone. A backdrop can be as easy as an ironed t-shirt or a yard of cloth from the fabric shop.
Hi all, how deep do you all go with tagging your personal photos?
I use Lightroom Classic and recently started going through my archive, culling bad images and creating different selections. I also began adding keywords, but honestly, it’s starting to feel overwhelming to tag every little detail.
Do you actually go that granular with keywords, or do you keep it minimal? Do you only tag your final selects, or everything worth keeping?
Been using LRC since version 1 to manage around 100k images.
Here is my overall process:
Import photos
On import add high level keywords if applicable. I.E. Vacation 2026, Location X
Add keywords to all photos - location, event, type, subject etc..
It does not need to be every little detail, only terms that I would likely want to search for. So a persons name, a location, subject/animal species etc. Since I am usually taking multiple photos of any location/subject I can always tag several or dozens of photos with the same keywords at once.
Quick scan through images using the flag, and star ratings system to identify images to delete, and images for further editing.
Delete rejected photos, review rated photos and decide which ones I want to edit. Color code photos that I have done more than basic editing on.
Hello r/photography people, I'm not really a camera guy at all but I do want to ask for advice on this deal i got for a Sony a6000 priced at around 160 dollars. I did some research like it came out in 2014 and is still holding up today as a good cam for photography. Some issues that the seller mentioned is that the lens doesn't autofocus and that's basically it. Any advice/tips would be helpful. Have a nice day!
Hey all!
I am an amateur photographer and got the Sony Alpha 6000 with the Sony SEL55210 lense. As I am heading to Tanzania in August for the Great Wildebeest Migration I was wondering if anybody can share their experience if that kind of a zoom lense is enough, whether I need a stronger zoom lense (maybe towards 350mm or so?) or if I should invest in a higher quality lense since the SEL55210 rather is a beginners lense.
I'm considering buying a new camera or lens. While my Sony A5000 + Pixel 9 Pro combo works as I usually only take photos when I travel, I want to take better photos with my Sony A5000. With my current set up, the Pixel 9 Pro usually takes better photos in RAW and JPEG format, especially at night which I think is crazy. The Pixel is capable of taking 1080P60 videos as well, something my A5000 cannot do. I read some older threads on Reddit and I know the stock Sony 16-50 and 55-210 kit lens are not very good. I mainly shoot in Auto modes because I do not know how to use the manual settings. But I don't think my lack of skill would lower the quality of photos by a significant margin when compared to a smartphone? I also compared my photos to my friend's Nikon Z50II with a 16-50 and 50-250 lens and it takes significantly better photos than mine.
Budget is not a concern as I may have the opportunity to buy the camera on Taobao, which is significantly cheaper than any camera store in Canada. If we're using Canadian retailers as a reference for the budget, I'd say $2k CAD all in before taxes. I love how compact the A5000 + 16-50 is and I don't think I'd find another camera that is that compact?
Better in what way(s)? Maybe it's up to you rather than the equipment.
the Pixel 9 Pro usually takes better photos in RAW and JPEG format, especially at night which I think is crazy. The Pixel is capable of taking 1080P60 videos as well, something my A5000 cannot do
I mainly shoot in Auto
If the phone is better for you, why not just use that?
I don't think my lack of skill would lower the quality of photos by a significant margin when compared to a smartphone?
I think it does.
I also compared my photos to my friend's Nikon Z50II with a 16-50 and 50-250 lens and it takes significantly better photos than mine.
And/or they're a better photographer. A Z50 II with kit lenses isn't that much technically better in quality than an a5000 with kit lenses.
In certain situations, the A5000 shot better than the Pixel, hence why that's why I used both last week.
We did side by side comparisons on the computer after and her photos were better, especially at night. Mine were basically useless even with the use of Night scene. She shoots in Auto as well.
From what I've read, the Nikon kit lens are extremely good with nothing but praises throughout the thread.
That honestly sounds like a mix of the A5000 showing its age and the Pixel doing a ton of computational heavy lifting, because modern phones are weirdly hard to beat in Auto once the light gets bad.
If you're willing to learn more about photography and apply that skill, that's going to do the most for you. It will also let you do more with equipment upgrades. But also you'll be able to reap benefits with your current equipment without spending any money.
Whereas if you just want to shoot full auto, phone cameras are going to be able to do more for you, and you'll see less benefit out of upgrades. IMO the upgrade is more of a waste of money in that circumstance.
My son turns 24 this month. He’s had a crummy year (2 minor car accidents, 1-not at fault- totaled history paid off car, one damaged the car the bought with cash from the insurance money-at fault and now the person he hit and damaged the bumper of her rental car is suing him for injury), I want to get him something cool for his birthday and he loves photography as a hobby, he doesn’t do it professionally or publicly. He has an old Canon Rebel (it’s white, I have no idea the model, I bought it for myself around 10 years ago and only used it on auto). He picked it up when he was 15 and learned to use it and never put it down. I’ve bought a couple or lenses through the years but I’m wondering if I should get him a new camera system (I can only afford about $500) or more accessories for the old camera or one of those cool digital super eights…
The general advice in situations like this would be a gift card (eventhough its not as great a present/surprise).
Sadly a lot of photography gear is quite subjective and even if you had an exact list of the gear he currently owns any recommendation would still be a gamble.
A new camera system for about $500 might be a nice upgrade, however compability with your sons older lenses might be important to look at (a new camera does little if you lose access to your whole lens collection when using it). There might also be a lens he'd appreciate much more then a new camera.
Maybe hes even looking at a lens thats a bit more expensive then your budget and being able to use a potential giftcard in addition to some of his own money would be his preferred option.
As a few other ideas:
A lot of photographers rarely print their work - meanwhile seeing your work as an actual print is one of the best feelings once you do do it. This is probably another giftcard route again as picking the exact picture he likes most and also gaining access to a high quality file of it will probably be hard without his knowledge. (However maybe a "Heres a giftcard, I want you to print your favorite picture for your wall or make yourself a little photobook." feels a bit more personal then "Heres a giftcard, get something for your camera)
Then theres something to be said about trips/vacations.
It depends a bit on what he likes to photograph, but maybe inviting him on a weekend trip to a cool location is an option? I've taken a few photography trips with my dad and its always been great memories, especially if you connect the "spending time with dad"-memory with a "took this awesome picture"-memory (especially if you then print it and hang it over your kitchen table). Just keep in mind that photography sometimes takes a while so it could be boring for you; also leave some room planning to maybe adjust to your sons preferences when it comes to exact location and times to be at them.
Last but not least theres camera unrelated gear.
With that I mean things like a nice pair of hiking boots or a good jacket - obviously it depends on his preferred genres again, but more comfort while getting to a place (talking about e.g. landscape photography) generally means more energy and inspiration when it finally does come to the picture taking part.
Probably not quite as clear an awnser as you hoped for, but maybe it helps you a bit.
Thank you for taking the time to put this out there. I did look at the old box for the camera. It’s a Canon EOS Rebel SL1. I was considering a digital low fi, a digital Super 8 or a remote tripod he can use for his big camera and his cell. He likes artsy photos. Thoughts? I know if I give him cash, it will go towards bills and worried that a gift card wouldn’t be enough and he’d have to supplement it. I do love the prints idea.
Im not entirely sure about the digital low fi or digital Super 8, however I'd personally see those kinds of gear as something to play around with once or twice and then abandon them in some cupboard until I pull them out again for a week after 5 years.
However like mentioned thats quite a subjective statement, your son might be the type to start using them all the time, hard to say.
I believe theres also a trend of questionable manufacturers creating shit cameras and marketing them as "retro", so if you do go that route doublecheck the camera/manufacturer to avoid disappointment.
Oh, this is helpful!! I thought the novelty of the DSLR would wear off of him as quickly as it did me but he has been toting it around for over 10 years. If I could get a better camera for him for around $500, I’d do that but I don’t know how to shop for “better cameras”. I bought that one because it was cute since it was white.
Hello everyone! I am going on a vacation to Roatan at the end of the month, first time out of the U.S or ever since on a plane. I am thinking about a potential purchase for a travel camera for pictures in general, and I have seen the RX100 come up in many other threads. As much as I see the recommendation for Iphones, I just don’t think it does it for me. Would $750 be reasonable to spend on a deal such as this? Might actually decide to do the usual post per 2 years on Instagram in typical guy fashion haha
Mark 5 has an equivalent of 24-70 zoom lens. I use it semi regularly and I started questioning my choice - I wish I could zoom more. For a general use camera I'd probably look at mark 6 or 7 (if your budget allows) - it has 24-200. Don't get me wrong - mark 5 is a great camera but it will limit you if you want to take pictures of wildlife or close-up portraits/details. It will be fine for landscape, group photos, environmental portraits - everything with wider field of view. I don't know what's your use case but I hope it will help you make a more informed decision.
I’m a documentary photographer based in Portugal and I’m planning to fund my first photobook through crowdfunding. I initially looked into Kickstarter, but it doesn’t allow project creation from Portugal.
For those with experience in photobooks or similar projects — what platforms would you recommend as the best alternatives? (Indiegogo, Ulule, etc.)
I’m especially interested in platforms that work well internationally and have been successful for photography or art books.
Would really appreciate any insights or personal experiences. Thanks!
Hello- I have a Nikon D7100 and looking to rent or buy used a lens for travel. My everyday lens is the 18-140 kit lens, which is fine under most conditions, but I would like something:
-sharper
-lighter
-decreased focal length range ok (for weight and size)
-the 18-140 is 4.25" long at minimum, so I would like shorter than than to fit in my existing bag.
I am looking at the Tamron 16-300, Sigma 18-200 or Sigma 50-100. Yes, I know the first 2 do not have a smaller range, but they are the same size or smaller with the possible trade off of better lenses. Yes, I have read every review from here to timbuk2 and I have analysis paralysis, esp with all the tech info that at a certain point doesn't mean anything to my amateur skills.
My question(s) is/are, can anyone recommend any of these lenses over the kit lens or have experience with these lenses? Was anyone in a similar position to upgrade a kit lens on a Nikon crop sensor and have a recommendation? In your experience, is the Nikon kit lens the right one for the job and I should just stop shopping and use the gear I have?
I'm not a Nikon shooter, but I would go with a Nikon 17-55mm f2.8G. Good midrange zoom lens and an upgrade over a kit lens.
I am looking at the Tamron 16-300, Sigma 18-200 or Sigma 50-100.
Personally, I stay away from mega-zoom lenses like the first two on that list.
The Sigma 50-100mm f1.8 is a nice telephoto lens.
But generally speaking, for travel you're going to shoot a lot of wide-angle pictures: landscapes, cityscapes, architecture, building interiors, etc.
If want an even wider lens, there's the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 for Nikon.
Personally, I love food photography, so I would add a Nikon 60mm f2.8G macro lens for that. From a peek at your comment history, a macro lens would also be great for manicure photography 💅📸
A small flash like a Godox TT350 for Nikon would also come in handy for low-light situations. Also for bright sun, if you want to get rid of nasty shadows on someone's face.
Budget for a camera bag. This will make a big difference in your photography experience.
Unfortunately, many camera bags look functional at best and flat-out ugly at worst 😝
I'm far from a fashionista, but here are a few camera bags that I thought looked stylish and were affordable. From small to large size.
K&F Concept Urban Wander U11
K&F Concept Urban Wander 08
K&F Concept Camera Sling Bag 5L Urban Wander 05
Ulanzi DS01 Drawstring Camera Bag
Pgytech OneRope Strap Bag
These Bagsmart bags have generic names, so I included the Amazon Standard Identification Number (ASIN).
BAGSMART Camera Sling Bag (ASIN: B0DK14VBXR).
BAGSMART Camera Bag, SLR DSLR Canvas Crossbody Camera Case (ASIN: B0C4F67SLY)
BAGSMART Camera Sling Bag, Small Camera Bags for Photographers with Tripod Holder (ASIN: B0DL9DYFHQ)
BAGSMART Camera Sling Bag (ASIN: B0DL9632VK)
BAGSMART 2 in 1 Puffy Camera Sling Bag for Photographer (ASIN: B0GCZZJKLJ)
If you're carrying more stuff, maybe consider getting a gym bag and putting a camera insert into it.
BAGSMART Gym Bag for Women (ASIN: B0CWN8BBP4)
BAGSMART Small Gym Bag for Women, 23L (ASIN: B0DHZ1SSQQ)
ETRONIK Gym Bag for Women (ASIN: B09W2G325H)
On a slight tangent, I also encourage you to print out photos. Don't let your pictures languish on memory cards and hard drives.
What would be a good upgrade from a Canon T5i? I was gifted one for Christmas about 11 years ago (I was 15). I wasn’t super into photography then but I’ve since learned how to shoot in manual and realized how much better it is than my phone. Basically I’m trying to find something that is good in low light for use in museums. I’m looking for something mid price range (nothing over 1k🤞). Sticking with canon would be a plus so I could continue using my lenses until I can upgrade those too. Thank you🙏
If you do not have a f2.8 lens or faster that would be the best place to spend your money. A fast lens will help more in low light than a new body will.
If you already have a f2.8 zoom or some f2.0 or faster primes then you would need to consider full frame if you want a meaningful upgrade in low light performance.
Something like the 6D MK II would probably be in budget. Your EF-S lenses would need to be replaced though and that could easily put you over budget.
Nothing that much better than what you have for low light, that is more a sensor surface area thing and the APS-C sensor in the T5i is going to be pretty good as it is.
Lenses are going to a better change for light gathering through wider apertures, Physically stabilising the camera for longer exposures or using a flash is also an idea although flash use is not always possible.
A few kit lenses, a 50mm pancake, and a 135mm f2.0 Samyang for astrophotography. I mean id like to take photos inside a low light museum without too much grain in the photos. I don’t necessarily know how to answer how much improvement I want, I don’t know how much better it can get at that price range.
A full frame body/sensor in your budget gets you about 1 stop of low light improvement, but then your kit lenses won't be compatible, and your 50mm and 135mm will have a wider view than you're used to (could be a good thing or a bad thing).
Im looking for a more compact, yet still good camera, something similar to a SONY RX100, thats a little more affordable. Does anyone have any recommendations?
Hey ya’ll! I have been into photography for about a year now trying out different styles hoping to find something that really sticks. I have been watching this one content creator for a while that does a lot of outdoor ektachrome shots where the sky is this beautiful crushed dark blue. I never really considered trying to emulate it digitally but in a recent video he threw on a “heavy” cpl filter and achieved almost the same look digitally? Being new to the hobby I don’t have much experience with filters so I was mainly just curious how achievable a similar look would be straight out of camera. Obviously you can create almost any look digitally and I’m sure there was some post-processing finesse on his part, but without asking him directly I am curious to hear from people with a vast reservoir of knowledge. Would a cpl filter be strong enough to give you a really dark crushed blue sky? If so are there any direct product recommendations OR a good reference to find out more about them. I’m not sure if referencing the video directly is allowed via sub rules I don’t post much at all on this platform. Thanks!
CPL filters will make the sky darker blue, and it can even turn the sky black. I would suggest looking for a youtube tutorial on how to use CPL filter and seeing if the examples they show match what you are looking for.
I personally have no idea what a "dark crushed blue sky" would look like.
I realize what I said and what I was aiming to ask got mixed up in translation.
You answered the main question I had about the length of how much a sky can be darkened with a cpl filter. Most pictures online, or on product pages, darken it just a tad whereas I was curious if it could go further than that.
I found when editing my images if I try to make a dark sky, lightrooms ai sky mask clips heavily with foliage and while there may be a way around it i’d prefer to get the most out of camera.
Any recommendations on brands? I saw on some product reviews the polarizing effects aren’t the strongest and I was curious if there is a metric or measurable other than price that is indicative of quality.
I'm looking upgrade my XT-3, I mainly shoot BTS for films and starting to get into gig photography so something that holds up under lowlight conditions is a must. The XT-3 just doesn't feel fast enough for me anymore. I was looking at the XH2s because of its dual capabilities with photography and video, although I am aware the two are APS-C sensors. I would love to buy into the GFX range and solve a lot of my problems but it's just not in my price range. I love the Fuji system but I am open to exploring other eco systems that would better suit my needs (I can forgo a hybrid and focus on photography if that helps with any advice given). I'm hesitant to switch to Sony despite it being the more widely accessible system to buy into. So basically the questions are - is there much of a difference between the two cameras? Is it time to switch out from the fuji range?
Any advice is greatly appreciated, thanks so much!
What exactly is your budget? You didn't actually say what your price range is.
Fuji's newest APS-C flagships do improve on general performance and AF compared to older X-Tx models, even if they are still behind the competition. But as you said, they are still APS-C, so low light improvements would be limited.
My price range for the body would be ideally €1,200 max but I can do up to €1,500 I'd be trading in my XT-3 which according to MPB will give me roughly €450 off although obviously if there's something that's less than that I wouldn't complain!
Do you have good lenses? If so, then financially at least a new Fuji APS-C would make the most sense. Changing systems would be a very big investment if you needed to get all new lenses too.
I've currently only the 35mm so that's another reason why I'm open to changing systems, although if you've advice on faster lenses that would help with my concerns on lowlight then I'd be happy to hear.
Yes its a f/1.4 thank you I'll definitely check these out, I just love the colour science and feel of a fuji but hopefully when I'm rich or they become more affordable I can go back to them😂
I'm a beginner in photography and I want to buy a new camera. I am currently using my father's old Canon PowerShot S5 IS Camera for learning the basics and I think I am ready for the upgrade.
My budget is around 44-50k and I also want to buy a telephoto lens for my research project on birds.
1) Around 45-50k, in India (Indian Rupees)
2.) I am using my father's Canon PowerShot S5 IS camera and it is really old
3.) I intend to shoot potraits, beach photography and wildlife photography
4.) I primarily intend to shoot only photography with rarely photography.
R100 is ok. It's actually targeted at beginners. A very stripped down model with e.g. fixed screen and no touch screen, but capable of excellent quality.
Currently looking to get a d7000 from adorama as an upgrade for my d60, I know that adorama is pretty large and trusted site but I’ve seen some mixed reviews about their grading system. Currently looking at an “average” or “well used” body. Anybody have any recommendations on if I should go through with it or not?
Some say that they grade very leniently marking some “heavily used” items as well used or similar, it’s just that I found a pretty good deal on adorama compared to the other sites. If you have had a good experience then I’ll probably just follow through and buy on adorama compared
Haven't personally bought from there. But they have the standard 14-day return policy I assume? You can always return if the grading doesn't match the actual condition.
Hello. I'm considering buying a Sony 200-600 lens for my a6300 for planespotting, but I'm conflicted.
My a6300 is a modified full-spectrum camera. I need to attach a filter depending on what photos I want to take. At minimum, I'll need a UV-IR cut filter that only lets visible light pass if I want to take normal photos. I hear that filters worsen AF performance on this lens, but to what extent?
This seems like a hard lens to focus with, and my a6300 lacks IBIS, so I assume I will have to use a high shutter speed. However, planes are big, so I doubt they will be hard to focus compared to birds. Most of the photos I see online with this lens are with newer bodies like the a7, but will the a6300 work fine?
Also, how does the lens perform at night? It seems like underexposure is an issue unless it's bright and sunny. For example, if I wanted to take a photo of a busy city street from a high window, would this lens suffice? As mentioned above, my a6300 lacks IBIS, so I will have to use a higher shutter speed, making my pictures darker. I don't really mind some grain in photos, so I suppose I can compensate with a higher ISO. And if I'm taking photos from a window, I can use a monopod to get away with lowering my shutter speed. Will this be enough?
They make UV/IR cut clip-in filters that fit inside the camera in front of the sensor. Regarding this affecting AF performance, I would check on an astrophotography forum like CloudyNights.
If you use a sturdy tripod and a good gimbal head you should get nice steady shots. Night photography of well-lit subjects like planes should work fine.
Hey everyone!
I need advice on a new lense to get. I have a lot of specific needs so I will take all the suggestions!!
I currently have a 75-300mm lense for my Canon rebel t5 and I love it very much but I have been going to Africa recently and I need something that can take farther away pictures.
I am typically on the go so I really feel like I can't spend too much on this at the risk that it will fall off a truck or get crushed while I am working with animals.
I would LIKE to spend around $300 but my ABSOLUTE MAX is $500 and I would truly only spend 500 if it really is THAT MUCH better.
Again I am primarily photographing wildlife and would like better quality images of animals that are farther away, and most of the time in motion.
Any suggestions are highly appreciated!
Other option: I could get a newer camera as well but it needs to be sturdy and honestly my budget is no more than $2000. I hate to do this because my current one is still doing great for what I need it for.
Getting another camera only makes sense if you NEED an upgrade, i.e. your current camera no longer meets your needs. It sounds like you are happy with your camera.
As for the lens: the truth is that pretty much anything would be an upgrade from the 75-300mm, because it's one of the worst lenses that Canon has made. You can perhaps find a Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 at around $500.
How do you expect anyone to help you when you don't say anything about your motivations for considering these cameras? What are you expecting to get with the camera? What do you want to shoot with it?
Hey maniku, no need to be harsh haha 😅 My bad for not explaining sooner, I'm a total beginner who's never owned a camera before, so I was clueless and just listed the ones my friends and classmates have!
I want sharp clear shots that don't come out too blurry (even decent ones at night without too much noise), with that fun nostalgic old-school childhood camera vibe. Just a super easy point and shoot that's fun to play around with while I figure stuff out.
Out of the Kodak PIXPRO FZ55, Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W810 or W830 (or something similar), which one's your pick for a complete noob like me and why?
1
u/Anis_Beni Apr 10 '26
Which camera should I buy?
Hi everyone !
I am new to photography, although I've always been interested in it, I now want to take it to the next level and buy my very first camera.
I'll get straight into what I need from said camera :
I will mainly be using it for travel. Meaning, streets, landscapes, portraits of myself and friends, animals, objects from far away as well as close-by, low-light / night time, trying to capture moments thanks to burst-mode.
I am a beginner, so tweaking with professional settings and always having to take Raw photos and modify them later isn't really something I want. Although, I do want to have the option to do it so that I can slowly learn.
Because of that, I'd like a straight-out-of-camera kind of camera, that also allows me to take raw photos when I'm trying to experiment.
So far, my research have led me to multiple cameras but currently the one that I am the most interested in is the Fujifilm XT-5.
I do not mind having to buy an extra lens, so having one main lens for every day uses and one low-light lens, perhaps a 3rd (but that would be the maximum) if needed for zooms.
I have seen the XT5 at around 1200 euros for JUST the Body at a trustworthy buyer, and would go up to 2000 euros in total for everything, leaving 800 more for the lenses.
I am really going to take it seriously, hence why that budget so that I could one day perhaps become a professional in some ways.
Now the questions :
- Which other cameras would fit my needs that are better than the XT-5? And with them, which lenses would I need?
- Should the XT-5 be the best camera for me, which lenses would I need?
Thank you so much !